CALCULATING STATIC DEFLECTION AND NATURAL FREQUENCY OF STEPPED

CANTILEVER BEAM USING MODIFIED RAYLEIGH METHOD

LUAY S. AL-ANSARI
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Kufa, An Anjaf, Iraq

ABSTRACT
Rayleigh method is one of classical methods used for calculating the natural frequency of the beam but it is not
accurate when the beam is a stepped beam. Rayleigh method was modified using a new method for calculating the
equivalent moment of inertia of stepped beam. In order to verify the new method, the static deflection and natural
frequency of four types of beam were calculated using classical Rayleigh method, modified Rayleigh method and Finite
Element Method (FEM) using ANSYS. The four types of beams were circular beam, square beam, rectangular beam with
stepping in width only and rectangular beam with stepping in height only. The comparison between the results of static
deflection and natural frequency for these four types of beams and for these three methods were made. A good agreement
was found between the results of static deflection calculated by ANSYS and modified Rayleigh methods for each type of
beam except the square beam specially when the length of larger step is more than half of the length of beam. Also, a good
agreement was found between the results of natural frequency calculated by ANSYS and modified Rayleigh methods for
each type of beam. That means the new method, used for calculating the equivalent moment of inertia, is a good method
for considering the effect of change in moment of inertia when the natural frequency is calculated.
KEYWORDS: Natural Frequency, Static Deflection, Stepping Cantilever Beam, Rayleigh Method, Modified Rayleigh
Method, Finite Elements Method, ANSYS, Stiffness of Beam, Equivalent Moment of Inertia, Point Equivalent Moment of
Inertia, Circular Beam, Square Beam, Rectangular Beam
INTRODUCTION
Variable cross-sectionbeams with and/or material properties are frequently used in aeronautical engineering (e.g.,
rotor shafts and functionally graded beams), mechanical engineering (e.g., robot arms and crane booms), and civil
engineering (e.g., beams, columns, and steel composite floor slabs in the single direction loading case).Over the years, a lot
of researches have been done with regard to the vibration of beam structures in many different configurations and
complexities. Free vibrations of a uniform and non-uniform beam according to the Timoshenko theory are the subject of
research of many authors, for example the papers [1-6] are devoted to these vibration problems. The exact and numerical
solutions for fundamental natural frequencies of stepped beams for various boundary conditions were presented Jang and
Bert [7, 8]. Wang [9] analyzed the vibration of stepped beams on elastic foundations. Lee and Bergman [10] studied the
vibration of stepped beams and rectangular plates based on an elemental dynamic flexibility method. They divided the
structure with discontinues into elemental substructures and obtained the displacement field for each in terms of its
dynamic Greens function. Based on the RayleighRitz method, Lee and Ng [11] computed the fundamental frequencies
and critical buckling loads of simply supported stepped beams by using two algorithms. Rosa et al. [12] performed the free
vibration analysis of stepped beams with intermediate elastic supports. Naguleswaran [13] analyzed the vibration and
stability of an Euler Bernoulli stepped beam with an axial force.An exact analytical solution for a cantilever beam of non-
uniform cross-section and carrying a mass at the free end has been obtained by Rossi et al. [14].
International Journal of Mechanical and
Production Engineering Research and
Development (IJMPERD)
ISSN 2249-6890
Vol. 3, Issue 4, Oct 2013, 107-118
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.
108 Luay S. Al-Ansari
Banerjee et al. [15]usedthe dynamic stiffness method to investigate the free bending vibration of rotating beams
with linearly changed cross-section. Ece et al. [16] solved the problem of the vibration of simply supported and
clampedbeams with varying cross-section width for three different types of boundary conditions associated, and free ends.
Exact displacement interpolation functions tolinearly changed cross-section beams were solved and then used to derive the
accurate stiffness matrix [17, 18]. They usedthe exact displacement interpolation functions to solve varied cross-section
beam problems is a straightforward way; however, they focused on the beam with linearly and continuously changed cross-
section. Solutions to the free vibration problem of stepped beams were presented by using the properties of Greens
function[19, 20]. Jaworski and Dowell [21] conducted an experiment of free vibration analysis of a stepped cantilevered
beam and compared the experiment results with ANSYS software and the classical Rayleigh-Ritz method, component
modal analysis, the local boundary conditions and non-uniform beam effects were discussed. Lu et al.[22] used the
composite element method to analyze free and forced vibrations of stepped beams and comparedthe theoretical results with
experimental results. Mao and Pietrzko [23] used the Adomian decomposition method to investigate the free vibrations of a
two-stepped beam, considering different boundary conditions, step locations, and step ratios. Zheng and Ji [24] presented
an equivalent representation of a stepped uniform beam to simplify the calculation of static deformations and frequencies.
In this work, Rayleigh method are modified by calculating the equivalent moment of inertia at each point along
the beam. The equivalent moment of inertia at each point is calculated by a new method that we called " the Point
Equivalent Moment of Inertia". For verifying the new method, the static deflection of stepping cantilever beam with four
different cross sections are calculated using Rayleigh method, Finite Element Method (FEM) using (ANSYS) software
version 14.0 and Modified Rayleigh method. The comparison between these results are done in order to understand the
effect of changing in moment of inertia. The natural frequency of stepping cantilever beam with four different cross
sections are also calculated using Rayleigh method, FEM using ANSYS software and Modified Rayleigh method. The
comparison between these results are done in order to understand the effect of changing in moment of inertia on the natural
frequency.
RAYLEIGH METHODS
Rayleigh method is a simpler method for finding the natural frequencies for uniform beam. It includes calculating
the potentialenergy and kineticenergy. Thepotential energy by integrating the stiffness through the length of the beamand
the kinetic energy can be calculated by integrating the mass through length of the beam. So one can get [21, 25, 26, 27]:

}
}
+
=
+
=
=
|
|

\
|
=
1
1
2
1
1
0
2
0
2
2
2
2
)) ( (
) (
n
i
i i
n
i
i i
l
l
y m
y m g
dx x y A
dx
dx
x y d
EI

e

(1)
Where: ( e ) is frequency, (E) is Modulus of Elasticity, (I) is Moment of Inertia, ()is Density, (A) is Cross
Section Area, (m) mass, and (y) is Deflection.
For stepped cantilever beam, the beam must be divided into several parts. In this work, the beam is divided into
(100) parts in other word, there is (101) mass. The magnitude of the first mass is ((*A
i
*X)/2) when (i) refers to the node
or mass number and (i=1). While the magnitude of the last mass is ((*A
i
*X)/2)when(i=100). When the node is the node
between the two steps the magnitude mass is (((*A
i
*X)/2)+((*A
i+1
*X)/2)) (see Figure (1)).
Calculating Static Deflection and Natural Frequency of Stepped Cantilever Beam Using Modified Rayleigh Method 109

Figure 1: The Dividing Scheme of the Stepping Cantilever Beam
By calculating the deflection of the beam(y(x)) using the following steps [21, 25, 26, 27]:
- Dividing the length of the beam into (n) parts (i.e. (n+1) nodes).
- Calculate the primary deflection (i.e. delta ()) at each point and then the delta matrix []
((n+1)* (n+1))
using Table
(1).
- Calculate the mass matrix [m]
((n+1))
using the distribution technique using in [21, 25, 26, 27].
- Calculate the deflection at each node by multiplying delta matrix and mass matrix ([y]
(n+1)
= [
]((n+1)* (n+1))
[m]
((n+1))

after applying the boundary conditions.
Table 1: Formulae of the Deflections of the Cantilever Beams[21, 25, 26, 27]

, ,



THE POINT EQUIVALENT MOMENT OF INERTIA
In the classical Method, the equivalent moment of inertia can be calculated by the following equation [21, 25, 26,
27]:
(2)
and for Nth stepped beam equation (2) can be written as:
(3)
In the point equivalent moment of inertia, the parameters, affect the value of equivalent moment of inertia, are the
length of steps and the dimensions of cross section area of the steps. The length of small part can be expressed as a
function of distance along thebeam. Now if the beam is only large part then the equivalent moment of inertia will be (I
2
).
But if the beam consists of two steps, the equivalent moments of inertia at the points that lie on the large step are (I
2
).
110 Luay S. Al-Ansari
While the equivalent moment of inertia at the points that lie on the small step are changed and depend on the position of
step change. The equivalent moment of inertia at any point lies on the small step can be written as [27]:
(4)
NUMERICAL APPROCH (FINITE ELEMENT METHOD)
In this method, the finite elements method was applied by using the ANSYS Software version 14.0. The three
dimensional model were built and the element (Solid Tet 10 node 187) were used [21, 28]. In this work, Four different
types of cross section area of beam are used (see Figure (2)):
- The first one is the circular cross section area. The diameter of larger area is (0.01) m and the diameter of smaller
area is (0.005) m and the length of the beam is (1 m) (see Figure (2-a)).
- The second is the square cross section area. The width of larger area is (0.01) m and the width of smaller area is
(0.005) m(see Figure (2-b)).
- The third is rectangular cross section area. The dimensions of larger area are(the width =0.02 m) and (the height
=0.02 m) and the dimensions of smaller area are (the width =0.01 m) and (the height =0.02 m)(see Figure (2-c)).
- The fourth is rectangular cross section area. The dimensions of larger area are(the width =0.02 m) and (the height
=0.02 m) and the dimensions of smaller area are (the width =0.02 m) and (the height =0.01 m)(see Figure (2-d)).

(a) Circular Stepped Beam (b) Square Stepped Beam

(c) Rectangular Stepped Beam (3rd Type) (d) Rectangular Stepped Beam (4th Type)
Figure 2: Types of the Beams Using in this Work
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
As mentioned previously, four types of beam were used in this work. In each one of these beams, the length of the
larger step changes from (0.1) m to (0.9) m with step (0.1) m. At the beginning, the equivalent moment of inertia for each
type of beam and for each step of the length of the larger step must be calculated using the new method. Then, the static
Calculating Static Deflection and Natural Frequency of Stepped Cantilever Beam Using Modified Rayleigh Method 111
deflection, at the position of (100 N) applied force must be calculated using the classical Rayleigh Method, the modified
Rayleigh Method and the Finite Element Method (ANSYS). Finally, the natural frequency for each type of beams and for
each step of the length of the larger step must be calculated using the classical Rayleigh Method, the modified Rayleigh
Method and the Finite Element Method (ANSYS).Therefore, the results can be divided into:
- Equivalent Moment of Inertia
Figures (3-6) show the variation of the equivalent moment of inertia, calculated by new method, along the length
of the beam for the four types of beam. From Figure (3), the value of the equivalent moment of inertia change depends on
the length of the larger step in addition to the distance (x). If the length of the larger step increases the final value of the
equivalent moment of inertia is closer to the value of moment of inertia of the larger step. Also the slope of the curve
decreases when the length of the larger step increases. The same behavior can be seen in Figure (4) but with the different
value of the maximum moment of inertia (i.e. moment of inertia of the larger area). In Figure (5) and Figure (6), the slope
of the curves change with the rate differ than that in Figure (3) and Figure (4). Also, the rate of change in slope in Figure
(5) differ than that in Figure (6) because the stepping happens in width only in Figure (5) and in height only in Figure (6).
Figures (7-10) show the comparison between the equivalent moment of inertia of the four types of beams,
calculated by new method, along the length of the beam when the length of the larger step is (0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8)
respectively. The rectangular beam with stepping in width only has a smaller rate of change in the value of equivalent
moment of inertia than that of the rectangular beam with stepping in height only, square beam and circular beam. In order
to understand that the equations used for calculating the moment of inertia must be remember. Also, the value of the
equivalent moment of inertia of square, rectangular beam with stepping in width only and rectangular beam with stepping
in height only will be close together when the length of the larger step increases.
- Static Deflection
Figures (11-14) show the comparison between the value of static deflection, calculated by ANSYS, classical
Rayleigh method and modified Rayleigh method, of circular beam along the position of the applied force when the length
of the larger step is (0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8) respectively. The values of static deflection calculated by modified Rayleigh
method are much closer to ANSYS results than that calculated by classical Rayleigh method. The agreement between the
results of static deflection calculated by modified Rayleigh method and ANSYS increases when the length of the larger
step decreases. But, The agreement between the results of static deflection calculated by classical Rayleigh method and
ANSYS increases when the length of the larger step increases.
Figures (15-18) show the comparison between the value of static deflection, calculated by ANSYS, classical
Rayleigh method and modified Rayleigh method, of square beam along the position of the applied force when the length of
the larger step is (0.2, 0.4, 0.6 and 0.8) respectively. The agreement between the results of static deflection calculated by
modified Rayleigh method and ANSYS decreases when the length of the larger step increases and the same behavior
happens for the agreement betweenclassical Rayleigh results and ANSYS results.
The same behavior, that appears in square beam, can be seen in static deflection of rectangular beam (3rd type and
4th type) (see Figures (19-26)). This lead us to say that "the modified Rayleigh method is better than the classical Rayleigh
method for calculating the static deflection of stepped cantilever beam".
- Natural Frequency
Figures (27-30) show the comparison between the value of natural frequency calculated by ANSYS, classical
112 Luay S. Al-Ansari
Rayleigh method and modified Rayleigh method, of circular, square and rectangular beam (3rd type and 4th type) beam
along the variation of the length of the large step. For the natural frequency, the results of modified Rayleigh method are
much closer to ANSYS results than the classical Rayleigh results.This lead us to say that "the modified Rayleigh method is
better than the classical Rayleigh method for calculating the natural frequency of stepped cantilever beam".
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
From the previous results, the following point can be concluded:
- The point equivalent moment of inertia is a good method for calculating the moment of inertia of stepped
cantilever beam. This method has a good sensitivity for the change in the length of the larger step.
- The slop of the equivalent moment of inertia depends on the length of the larger step, shape of stepping (i.e. two
dimensions stepping or one dimension stepping) and the shape of cross section area (i.e. the equation of moment
of inertia).
- The modified Rayleigh method is better than the classical Rayleigh method for calculating the static deflection of
stepped cantilever beam.
- The modified Rayleigh method is better than the classical Rayleigh method for calculating the natural frequency
of stepped cantilever beam.
Finally, the modified Rayleigh method can be used for calculating the static deflection and natural frequency for
stepped beam (with number of step larger than two) and non-prismatic beam.






Figure 3: The Equivalent Moment of Inertia
along the Length of the Circular Beam for
Different Length of Larger Step
Figure 4: The Equivalent Moment of Inertia
along the Length of the Square Beam for
Different Length of Larger Step
Figure 5: The Equivalent Moment of Inertia
along the Length of the Rectangular
Beam(3
rd
Type) for Different Length of
Larger Step
Figure 6: The Equivalent Moment of Inertia
along the Length of the Rectangular
Beam(4
th
Type) for Different Length of
Larger Step
Calculating Static Deflection and Natural Frequency of Stepped Cantilever Beam Using Modified Rayleigh Method 113











Figure 7: The Comparison between the
Equivalent Moment of Inertia along the
Length of the Four Types of Beam When the
Length of Larger Step is (0.2) m
Figure 8: The Comparison between the
Equivalent Moment of Inertia along the
Length of the Four Types of Beam When the
Length of Larger Step is (0.4) m
Figure 9: The Comparison between the
Equivalent Moment of Inertia along the
Length of the Four Types of Beam When the
Length of Larger Step is (0.6) m
Figure 10: The Comparison between the
Equivalent Moment of Inertia along the
Length of the Four Types of Beam When the
Length of Larger Step is (0.8) m
Figure 11: The Static Deflection of the
Circular Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.2) m
Figure 12: The Static Deflection of the
Circular Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.4) m
114 Luay S. Al-Ansari










Figure 13: The Static Deflection of the
Circular Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.6) m
Figure 14: The Static Deflection of the
Circular Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.8) m
Figure 16: The Static Deflection of the
Square Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.4) m
Figure 15: The Static Deflection of the
Square Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.2) m
Figure 17: The Static Deflection of the
Square Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.6) m
Figure 18: The Static Deflection of the
Square Beam Calculated by Different
Methods When the Length of Larger Step is
(0.8) m
Calculating Static Deflection and Natural Frequency of Stepped Cantilever Beam Using Modified Rayleigh Method 115








Figure 21: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (3
rd
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.6) m
Figure 22: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (3
rd
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.8) m
Figure 23: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (4
th
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.2) m
Figure 24: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (4
th
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.4) m
Figure 20: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (3
rd
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.4) m
Figure 19: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (3
rd
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.2) m
116 Luay S. Al-Ansari











Figure 25: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (4
th
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.6) m
Figure 26: The Static Deflection of the
Rectangular Beam (4
th
Type) Calculated by
Different Methods When the Length of
Larger Step is (0.8) m
Figure 27: The Variation of Natural
Frequency of the Circular Beam Calculated
by Different Methods with the Length of
Larger Step
Figure 28: The Variation of Natural
Frequency of the Square Beam Calculated
by Different Methods with the Length of
Larger Step
Figure 29: The Variation of Natural
Frequency of the Rectangular Beam (3
rd

Type)Calculated by Different Methods with
the Length of Larger Step
Figure 30: The Variation of Natural
Frequency of the Rectangular Beam (4
th

Type) Calculated by Different Methods with
the Length of Larger Step
Calculating Static Deflection and Natural Frequency of Stepped Cantilever Beam Using Modified Rayleigh Method 117
REFERENCES
1. Bystrzycki J., Rwnania ruchu belek sprystych (1977), belka Timoshenki, Warszawska Drukarnia Naukowa,
Warszawa.
2. Lueschen G.G.G., Bergman L.A., McFarland D.M. (1996), Greens Functions for uniform Timoshenko beams,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 194(1), 93-102.
3. Kukla S., Dynamiczne funkcje Greena w (1999), analizie drga wasnych cigych i dyskretno-cigych ukadw
mechanicznych, Monografie nr 64, Czstochowa.
4. Kukla S. (1997), Application of Green functions in frequency analysis of Timoshenko beams with oscillators,
Journal of Sound and Vibration, 205(3), 355-363.
5. Posiadaa B. (1997), Free vibrations of uniform Timoshenko beams with attachments, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 359-369.
6. Tong X., Tabarrok B., Yeh K.Y. (1995), Vibration analysis of Timoshenko beams with nonhomogeneity and
varying cross-section, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 186(5), 821-835.
7. S.K. Jang, C.W. Bert (1989), Free vibration of stepped beams: higher mode frequencies and effects of steps on
frequency, J. Sound Vib. 132, 164168.
8. S. K. JANG and C. W. BERT (1989) Journal Sound and Vibration 130, 342-346. Free vibration of stepped beams:
exact and numerical solutions
9. J.I. Wang (1991), Vibration of stepped beams on elastic foundations, J. Sound Vib. 149, 315322.
10. J. Lee, L.A. Bergman (1994), The vibration of stepped beams and rectangular plates by an elemental dynamic
flexibility method, J. Sound Vib. 171, 617640.
11. H.P. Lee, T.Y. Ng (1994), Vibration and buckling of a stepped beam, Appl. Acoust. 42, 257266.
12. M.A. De Rosa, P.M. Belles, M.J. Maurizi (1995), Free vibrations of stepped beams with intermediate elastic
supports, J. Sound Vib. 181, 905910.
13. S. Naguleswaran(2003), Vibration and stability of an EulerBernoulli beam with up to three-step changes in
cross-section and in axial force, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 45, 15631579.
14. R. E. ROSSI, P. A. A. LAURA and R. H. GUTIERREZ (1990), Journal of Sound and Vibration 143, 491-502. A
note on transverse vibrations of a Timoshenko beam of non-uniform thickness clamped at one end and carrying a
concentrated mass at the other.
15. J. R. Banerjee, H. Su, and D. R. Jackson (2006), Free vibration of rotating tapered beams using the dynamic
stiffness method, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 298, no. 4-5, pp. 10341054.
16. M. C. Ece, M.Aydogdu, and V. Taskin (2007), Vibration of a variable cross-section beam, Mechanics Research
Communications, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 7884.
17. F. Romano and G. Zingone (1992), Deflections of beams with varying rectangular cross section, Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, vol. 118, no. 10, pp. 21282134,.
118 Luay S. Al-Ansari
18. C. Franciosi and M. Mecca (1998), Some finite elements for the static analysis of beams with varying cross
section, Computers and Structures, vol. 69, no. 2, pp. 191196.
19. J. Lee and L. A. Bergman (1994), The vibration of stepped beams and rectangular plates by an elemental
dynamic flexibility method, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 171, no. 5, pp. 617640.
20. S. Kukla and I. Zamojska (2007), Frequency analysis of axially loaded stepped beams by Greens function
method, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 300, no. 3-5, pp. 10341041.
21. J. W. Jaworski and E. H. Dowell (2008), Free vibration of a cantilevered beam with multiple steps: comparison
of several theoretical methods with experiment, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 312, no. 4-5, pp. 713725.
22. Z. R. Lu, M. Huang, J. K. Liu, W. H. Chen, and W. Y. Liao (2009), Vibration analysis of multiple-stepped
beams with the composite element model, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 322, no. 4-5, pp. 10701080.
23. Q. Mao and S. Pietrzko (2010), Free vibration analysis of stepped beams by using Adomian decomposition
method, Applied Mathematics and Computation, vol. 217, no. 7, pp. 34293441.
24. T. X. Zheng and T. J. Ji (2011), Equivalent representations of beams with periodically variable crosssections,
Engineering Structures, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 706719.
25. Y. Huang and X. F. Li (2010), A new approach for free vibration of axially functionally graded beams with non-
uniform cross-section, Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 329, no. 11, pp. 22912303.
26. Dr. Luay S. Al-Ansari Muhannad Al-Waily and Ali M. H. Yusif Al-Hajjar (2012), "Experimental and Numerical
Study of Crack Effect on Frequency of Simply Supported Beam "; Al-Khwarizmi Engineering Journal.
27. Dr. Luay S. Al-Ansari (2012), " Calculating of Natural Frequency of Stepping Cantilever Beam", International
Journal of Mechanical & Mechatronics Engineering IJMME-IJENS, Vol.:12, No.:05, pp. 59-68.
28. T. Stolarski Y.Nakasone and S. Yoshimoto (2006), " Engineering Analysis with ANSYS Software"; Elsevier
Butterworth-Heinemann ; 2006.